Untitled - Api-fellowships.org

MULTIPLE IDENTITIES VIA SPIRITUALITY, HISTORIES AND CULTURAL RE-PRESENTATIONS 173Asian identity. Through its international relations andinteractions, Southeast Asia has developed regionalpatterns and characteristics, which help in recognizingits regional identity. In addition, this argument isimportant because, on the one hand, “the almostuniversal tendency of historians” has been “to focus onthe constituent parts of Southeast Asia rather than todevelop a perception of the region as a whole, as asuitable subject of study” (Legge 1992, 4-5). On theother hand, political scientists and security studieshave neglected the questions regarding whatconstitutes the components of the regions and whatmakes the region exist (Acharya 2000, 1).With the development of Southeast Asia itself and ofSoutheast Asian studies as a field of its own, a newapproach has emerged for studying Southeast Asia:that of approaching the region from interdisciplinaryperspectives such as history, anthropology,international relations, comparative politics, etc. Mostof these perspectives try to show the new importanceof the region and regionalism. Regionalism wasdeveloped over several different stages beginning withthe establishment of the Southeast Asia Command(SEAC) through inter-regional linkages within SEA,on to the creation of the first regional organization.The new ways of thinking about regions andregionness that have emerged consist of both culturalhistorical,as well as political factors. If the first idea ofinter-regional linkages is represented by the concept ofthe Mandala state of O.W. Wolters (1999), 2 theresearch on “theatre state” of Clifford Geertz (1980), 3and the idea of “galactic polity” of Stanley Tambiah(1985), the second takes a look at the evolution ofregionalism as a product of interaction. Throughinteraction, regionalism and regionness can developnorms, standards, values, policies, organization, andlast, but not least, identity. In this way, we can say thatidentity is socially constructed. 4The most successful political form that Southeast Asiahas thus far achieved is ASEAN way. The developmentof ASEAN represents a quest not only for anorganizational but also for a regional identity.According to Acharya: “Regions are sociallyconstructed, rather than geographically or ethnosociallypre-ordained. Southeast Asian regionnesscannot be established by simply looking at itsgeographic proximity or shared cultural attributes.Regions like nation-states are imagined communities”(Acharya 2000, 11).The formation of the ASEAN identityOn 8 August 1967, ASEAN was created in Bangkokwith the participation of Indonesia, Malaysia,Singapore, the Philippines, and Thailand. Althoughthe Bangkok Declaration stated that ASEAN is opento “all States in the South-East Asian regionsubscribing to the aims, principles and purposes”, it didnot define clear boundaries of the region itself.The motivation of the ASEAN foundation was notonly to “accelerate the economic growth, socialprogress and cultural development in the region,” butalso “to promote regional peace and stability”.Whether consciously or unconsciously, considerationsof national and regional security also figured largely inthe minds of the founders of the ASEAN. In fact, theimmediate motivation to form ASEAN was a commondesire of its members for collective action towardexternal powers. According to Prime Minister LeeKuan Yew (1978), the formation of ASEAN helpedthe members “to have their interests taken intoconsideration when great powers make theircompromises”. However, in comparison to externalthreats which could be considered differently, theASEAN members shared a common perception ofinternal threats. This was explained by the fear of thenational liberation movement in Vietnam, Laos, andCambodia, and by the communist insurgency alongthe border areas between Malaysia and Thailand, andbetween Malaysia and Indonesia. The agreementsregarding the common control of the border betweenThailand and Malaysia in 1959, Indonesia and thePhilippines in 1964 and between Indonesia andMalaysia in 1967 explained the strengthening of thebilateral security cooperation between ASEANmembers.The creation of ASEAN also marked tremendouschanges in the Southeast Asian environment. First,with its final abandonment of Konfrontasi(confrontation), the New Order regime of PresidentSuharto in Indonesia provided new impetus forregional integration. Second, since its separation fromthe Malaysian Federation in 1965, Singapore felt moresecure upon joining a regional organization such asASEAN. Third, the other ASEAN members likeThailand, Malaysia, and the Philippines also sawASEAN as a tool for fostering and strengtheningmutual trust and understanding among its members.Fourth, the creation of ASEAN also reflected changesin the rivalry between big powers. In the second half ofThe Work of the 2010/2011 API Fellows